Updated 9 h ago

Vulnerability database

Every flaw the U.S. government’s cybersecurity agency (CISA) has confirmed attackers are using, plus the new WordPress plugin and theme bugs published each day, sorted by what they mean for a small business. We refresh it twice a day. If you see something your website or office runs, tell us.

1,764exploited flaws on CISA’s list

35added in the last 30 days

457new WordPress flaws this week

390,525entries in the database

9,136 results · page 1 of 183

Oct 29, 2026HashiCorp Boundary and Boundary Enterprise are vulnerable to a server-side request forgery in the Vault credential store integration that may allow an authenticCVE-2026-13303 · Other software · HashiCorp · reported by security@hashicorp.comHigh 8.7
HashiCorp Boundary and Boundary Enterprise are vulnerable to a server-side request forgery in the Vault credential store integration that may allow an authenticated user with permission to manage credential stores and credential libraries within a project to cause the Boundary controller to issue outbound requests to a network destination of the requester's choosing and to receive the response. This may expose endpoints reachable only from the controller's host, such as a cloud instance metadata service. This vulnerability, CVE-2026-13303, is fixed in Boundary Enterprise 1.0.2 and 0.21.6.
Product
Boundary
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record discuss.hashicorp.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-119191 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubHigh 7.5
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used asn1.fromDer(), BIT STRING decoding, maxDepth to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge decoded ASN.1 stored inside BIT STRING values without consistently applying the configured maxDepth limit and recursively retained copies at each nesting level. Crafted DER containing nested BIT STRINGs could cause excessive recursion, CPU use, and quadratic memory consumption during asn1.fromDer(). This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-119190 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubHigh 7.4
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, node-forge parsed deprecated extension OIDs 2.5.29.10 and 2.5.29.13 as basicConstraints, and pki.verifyCertificateChain() used the first extension with that name. Exploitation requires a CA trusted by the application to issue a certificate carrying an attacker-supplied deprecated-OID extension, commonly because the CA copies extensions from a certificate signing request. By placing a permissive deprecated extension before the genuine 2.5.29.19 basicConstraints extension, the certificate holder could have the certificate accepted as a CA and issue certificates for arbitrary names, enabling server or client impersonation. If the issuing CA adds a keyUsage extension without keyCertSign, node-forge rejects the chain. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-119189 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubMedium 5.9
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, node-forge enforced an X.509 CA certificate's basicConstraints.pathLenConstraint only when that certificate also carried a keyUsage extension. Exploitation requires a path-length-constrained CA without keyUsage that chains to a root trusted by the application, and an attacker who holds that CA's private key or obtains a subordinate CA certificate from it. The attacker could then construct a chain exceeding the declared path length that still passed pki.verifyCertificateChain(). Public web PKI CA certificates normally include keyUsage; private PKIs with CA certificates created without it are more likely to be affected. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-119188 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubHigh 7.5
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used forge.tls.createConnection(), fragmented handshake message, interleaved record to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge continued processing after a TLS record of another content type interrupted a fragmented handshake message. A remote peer could trigger an uncaught TypeError in process(), causing the connection or hosting process to fail. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-119187 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubHigh 7.5
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used forge.tls.createConnection(), TLS record processing, process() to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge processed received TLS records recursively, consuming one JavaScript stack frame per record in a single input chunk. A remote peer could send thousands of small records together and exhaust the call stack, causing an uncaught exception and denial of service. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-119186 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubMedium 5.9
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, node-forge did not validate the AES-GCM tagLength option passed to start() during decryption through forge.cipher.createDecipher(). When an application derived tagLength from received data or used an unset or zero-like configuration value, a value that converted to zero together with an empty or missing authentication tag caused the calculated and supplied tags to compare as empty, so decipher.finish() accepted unauthenticated ciphertext. Applications that omit tagLength to use the 128-bit default or pass a fixed valid tag length are unaffected. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118782 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubHigh 7.5
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, node-forge accepted a PKCS#12 MAC or PKCS#12 password-based encryption iteration count of zero or less. pki.pbe.generatePkcs12Key() then returned a constant key independent of the password and salt, allowing crafted PKCS#12 input processed by forge.pkcs12.pkcs12FromAsn1() to bypass password-based integrity checks. Predictable encryption keys and IVs also affected PKCS#12 PBE using pbeWithSHAAnd3-KeyTripleDES-CBC or pbewithSHAAnd40BitRC2-CBC, including shrouded key bags, encrypted SafeContents, and PKCS#8 ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY input processed independently by forge.pki.decryptPrivateKeyInfo(). PBES2/PBKDF2-encrypted content is unaffected. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118781 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubLow 2.9
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used BigInteger.prototype.modInverse(), bnModInverse(), lib/jsbn.js, RSA public exponent e to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge's bundled jsbn implementation entered an infinite loop when BigInteger.prototype.modInverse() received a negative value or modulus. An attacker who could control the RSA public exponent passed to key generation, or a direct modInverse() operand, could block the Node.js event loop at full CPU. Parsed DER, PEM, JWK, PKCS#12, X.509, and TLS values are unsigned and cannot trigger this issue. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118780 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubLow 3.7
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used pki.verifyCertificateChain(), pki.createCaStore(), duplicate subject names to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge modified the CA store while trying certificates that shared a subject name during pki.verifyCertificateChain(). A failed chain verification could permanently remove trusted CA certificates from the store, causing later valid chains to fail and creating a persistent availability impact for applications that reused the store. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118779 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubHigh 7.5
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used pem.decode(), lib/pem.js, missing END line to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge used polynomial-time regular expressions in pem.decode(), including when searching for a matching END line and parsing encapsulated headers. An unauthenticated attacker able to supply PEM input to any high-level parser could consume excessive CPU with a long malformed message and cause denial of service. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118778 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubMedium 5.9
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used forge.tls.createConnection(), c.session.serverCertificate, RSA key exchange to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge's TLS client checked the wrong property when deciding whether a server certificate was missing. A malicious TLS server or on-path peer could omit the Certificate message and reach code that dereferenced the absent certificate, causing an uncaught exception and terminating the connection or process. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118777 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubMedium 4.8
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the forge.http client stored cookie names and paths from Set-Cookie response headers in ordinary JavaScript objects. A malicious server could use the cookie name __proto__ so that the attacker-controlled cookie path was written as a property on Object.prototype, or use inherited names such as constructor to modify Object. An empty cookie value could use the removal path to delete an inherited Object.prototype property. Applications using forge.http directly or through forge.xhr are affected; applications that do not use forge.http are unaffected. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118776 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubLow 3.7
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used decipher.finish(), CBC and ECB modes, PKCS#7 padding to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge validated only the final byte of PKCS#7 padding during CBC and ECB decryption and accepted zero, oversized, or mismatched padding bytes. Malformed ciphertext could consequently be accepted and up to four plaintext blocks could be silently removed, causing an integrity failure in applications that treated successful decryption as proof of valid padding. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118775 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubLow 3.7
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, asn1.oidToDer() in lib/asn1.js did not range-check the first two arcs of an OID. An application that accepted an untrusted OID string, checked or authorized that string, and then encoded it with asn1.oidToDer() could emit DER representing a different, trusted OID from the one that was checked. DER parsing is not affected. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript.CVE-2026-118774 · Other software · digitalbazaar · reported by GitHubLow 3.7
Forge (also called node-forge) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. Prior to 1.4.1, the affected implementation used certificate.verify(child), _verifySignature(), lib/x509.js to process the relevant input or security decision. node-forge selected RSA padding and RSASSA-PSS parameters from the issuer certificate rather than the child certificate being verified. A child labeled as RSASSA-PSS could therefore be accepted with a PKCS#1 v1.5 signature when the issuer used PKCS#1 v1.5. The signature still had to be produced with the trusted issuer's private key, so this did not permit certificate identity forgery, but it could bypass policies that require a declared signature scheme. This issue is fixed in version 1.4.1.
Product
forge
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 29, 2026A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in the url/title/author/coverUrl component of FocusPodcast versionCode 70allows attackers to scan internal resources via suCVE-2026-107046 · Other software · reported by MITRE
A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in the url/title/author/coverUrl component of FocusPodcast versionCode 70allows attackers to scan internal resources via supplying a crafted URL.
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record f-droid.org github.com
Oct 29, 2026Crawl4AI before 0.9.5 contains a blind server-side request forgery vulnerability in the Docker server that allows API clients to bypass the egress proxy by enabCVE-2026-119122 · Other software · unclecode · reported by VulnCheckMedium 6.9
Crawl4AI before 0.9.5 contains a blind server-side request forgery vulnerability in the Docker server that allows API clients to bypass the egress proxy by enabling check_cache_freshness. Attackers can cache a controlled URL, then trigger CacheValidator to follow 302 redirects or DNS rebinding to internal and cloud-metadata addresses for port and service discovery.
Product
crawl4ai
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com vulncheck.com
Oct 29, 2026IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF).CVE-2026-104331 · Other software · IBM · reported by psirt@us.ibm.comMedium 5.4
IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). This may allow an authenticated attacker to send unauthorized requests from the system, potentially leading to network enumeration or facilitating other attacks.
Product
Langflow OSS
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record ibm.com
Oct 29, 2026IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF).CVE-2026-104315 · Other software · IBM · reported by psirt@us.ibm.comMedium 4.3
IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). This may allow an authenticated attacker to send unauthorized requests from the system, potentially leading to network enumeration or facilitating other attacks.
Product
Langflow OSS
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record ibm.com
Oct 29, 2026IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vuCVE-2026-104310 · Other software · IBM · reported by psirt@us.ibm.comMedium 4.3
IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability.
Product
Langflow OSS
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record ibm.com
Oct 29, 2026IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to a server-side request forgery vulnerabiCVE-2026-102590 · Other software · IBM · reported by psirt@us.ibm.comMedium 5
IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to a server-side request forgery vulnerability.
Product
Langflow OSS
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record ibm.com
Oct 29, 2026WPFunnels: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)CVE-2026-27062 · WordPress plugins & themes · reported by PatchstackMedium 4.3
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WPFunnels Team WPFunnels wpfunnels allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects WPFunnels: from n/a through 3.13.5.
Product
WPFunnels
Affected
up to 3.13.5
What to do
Affects up to 3.13.5. Update WPFunnels to the newest version and check its changelog mentions this fix; if there isn’t one yet, deactivate it until there is.
Full record and what to do →NVD record patchstack.com
Oct 29, 2026Insecure permissions in the feiertage.ImportActivity component of Arbeitszeiterfassung2 versionCode 159 allows unauthorized attackers to create forged holiday/wCVE-2026-107019 · Other software · reported by MITRE
Insecure permissions in the feiertage.ImportActivity component of Arbeitszeiterfassung2 versionCode 159 allows unauthorized attackers to create forged holiday/work-time entries via crafted ICS imports.
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record f-droid.org github.com
Oct 29, 2026InstaWP Connect: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)CVE-2026-116399 · WordPress plugins & themes · reported by PatchstackHigh 8.8
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in InstaWP InstaWP Connect instawp-connect allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects InstaWP Connect: from n/a through 0.1.4.2.
Product
InstaWP Connect
Affected
up to 0.1.4.2
What to do
Affects up to 0.1.4.2. Update InstaWP Connect to the newest version and check its changelog mentions this fix; if there isn’t one yet, deactivate it until there is.
Full record and what to do →NVD record patchstack.com
Oct 29, 2026Server-side request forgery in the SmartIT URL-based attachment feature of BMC IT Service Management Suite versions 25.3.01, 25.4.01, and 26.1.01 allows authentCVE-2026-113688 · Other software · BMC · reported by 47237f96-ddbe-4467-a5ee-293a770beacdMedium 5.3
Server-side request forgery in the SmartIT URL-based attachment feature of BMC IT Service Management Suite versions 25.3.01, 25.4.01, and 26.1.01 allows authenticated users to make server-side requests to internal services and observe response information.
Product
BMC IT Service Management Suite
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record docs.helixops.ai docs.helixops.ai
Oct 29, 2026Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in SABBATIC application that allows an attacker can trick an authenticated user into clicking a malicious link oCVE-2026-5702 · Other software · SABBATIC · reported by cve-coordination@incibe.esMedium 4.8
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in SABBATIC application that allows an attacker can trick an authenticated user into clicking a malicious link or loading a page that sends unauthorized requests to a vulnerable endpoint.
Product
SABBATIC app
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record incibe.es
Oct 29, 2026Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Apache Camel A2A component.CVE-2026-71569 · Websites & servers · Apache Software Foundation · reported by security@apache.orgMedium 4.8
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Apache Camel A2A component. This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.21.0 before 4.22.2. WebhookUrlValidator classified a push notification webhook host in two places that did not agree. A host written as an IP literal was matched against a list of string prefixes that named the IPv6 unique local range fc00::/7, while a host reached through a name was resolved and the resulting address classified with the InetAddress predicates isLoopbackAddress, isAnyLocalAddress, isLinkLocalAddress and isSiteLocalAddress. Those predicates do not cover the same ground as the prefix list: isSiteLocalAddress reports the deprecated fec0::/10 block and not the fc00::/7 unique local addresses that replaced it, and the JDK carries no predicate for them at all. The same address was therefore accepted or rejected depending on how it was written, and a webhook URL whose host name resolved into fc00::/7 passed a guard that refused the identical address given as a literal. PushNotificationDispatcher then sent the push notification to that address, together with any Authorization header carried in the same configuration, whose scheme and credentials the
Product
Apache Camel
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record camel.apache.org github.com
Oct 29, 2026download_remote_file that: WebToffee Product Import Export for WooCommerce 2.5.1 before 2.6.8 contains a server-side request forgeryCVE-2026-118989 · WordPress plugins & themes · reported by VulnCheckMedium 5.1
WebToffee Product Import Export for WooCommerce 2.5.1 before 2.6.8 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in download_remote_file that allows shop_manager users to reach internal services via redirects. Attackers can submit a .csv URL that returns an HTTP 302 redirect to an internal address, causing the server to fetch internal responses and return them as import data.
Product
download_remote_file that
Fixed in
2.6.8
What to do
Update download_remote_file that to 2.6.8 or newer.
Full record and what to do →NVD record plugins.trac.wordpress.org plugins.trac.wordpress.org
Oct 29, 2026A server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the Foxit official website’s HTML-to-PDF conversion service.CVE-2026-111418 · Other software · Foxit Software Inc. · reported by 14984358-7092-470d-8f34-ade47a7658a2High 7.5
A server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the Foxit official website’s HTML-to-PDF conversion service. Support for ZIP-formatted input can bypass restrictions on requests to internal IP addresses, potentially allowing discovery of internal network resources.
Product
foxit.com
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record foxit.com
Oct 28, 2026n8n before 1.123.83, 2.41.4, and 2.42.1 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in the Slack Trigger webhook that allows unauthenticated attackers CVE-2026-118679 · Other software · n8n-io · reported by VulnCheckMedium 6.9
n8n before 1.123.83, 2.41.4, and 2.42.1 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in the Slack Trigger webhook that allows unauthenticated attackers to exfiltrate Slack tokens by bypassing signature verification when no signing secret is set. Attackers who know the webhook URL can name a file to download, causing the node to send the workspace access token to an attacker host and return the response.
Product
n8n
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com vulncheck.com
Oct 28, 2026HCL BigFix AEX is affected by a Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability, which could allow an attacker to cause the application to send unauthorized requests CVE-2026-67077 · Other software · HCL Software · reported by psirt@hcl.comMedium 4.2
HCL BigFix AEX is affected by a Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability, which could allow an attacker to cause the application to send unauthorized requests to external resources. Successful exploitation could lead to access to unintended services, sensitive information disclosure, or unauthorized actions through the affected application.
Product
BigFix AEX
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record support.hcl-software.com
Oct 28, 2026MemberPress: Cross-Site Request ForgeryCVE-2026-92797 · WordPress plugins & themes · reported by WordfenceHigh 8.8
The MemberPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 1.14.1. This is due to a bypassable nonce verification check in the save_profile_fields() function that uses an isset() condition at line 1119, allowing the security check to be completely bypassed by simply omitting the nonce parameter from the request. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to change authenticated users' email addresses via a forged request granted they can trick an authenticated user into performing an action such as clicking on a link, leading to account takeover through password reset functionality.
Product
MemberPress
Affected
up to 1.14.1
What to do
Affects up to 1.14.1. Update MemberPress to the newest version and check its changelog mentions this fix; if there isn’t one yet, deactivate it until there is.
Full record and what to do →NVD record memberpress.com wordfence.com
Oct 28, 2026VikRentCar Car Rental Management System: Cross-Site Request ForgeryCVE-2026-111120 · WordPress plugins & themes · reported by WordfenceHigh 8.8
The VikRentCar Car Rental Management System plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.4.8. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the condtext_update_tmpl function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to write arbitrary PHP code to the plugin's executable template files such as site/helpers/email_tmpl.php, which are later include()d by loadEmailTemplate() and loadPdfTemplate(), achieving remote code execution on the server via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. The injected PHP payload bypasses sanitization because the plugin's own __PHP_OPEN__/__PHP_CLOSE__ placeholder expansion and cleanPHPSourceCode() logic explicitly reverse both sanitize_text_field filtering and saveHTML() HTML-encoding, restoring a literal <?php...?> payload to live PHP before it is written to disk. Successful exploitation additionally requires an action by an administrator — the attacker cannot trigger the vulnerability on their own.
Product
VikRentCar Car Rental Management System
Affected
up to 1.4.8
What to do
Affects up to 1.4.8. Update VikRentCar Car Rental Management System to the newest version and check its changelog mentions this fix; if there isn’t one yet, deactivate it until there is.
Full record and what to do →NVD record plugins.trac.wordpress.org plugins.trac.wordpress.org
Oct 27, 2026mews/pos through 2.0.0 contains an insufficient verification of data authenticity vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to forge payment results bCVE-2026-118377 · Other software · mewebstudio · reported by VulnCheckHigh 8.7
mews/pos through 2.0.0 contains an insufficient verification of data authenticity vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to forge payment results by submitting unverified callbacks. GarantiPos, PayForPos and InterPos 3D Pay and 3D Host handlers skip check3DHash(), letting attackers post tampered status, amount or order ID fields to complete orders without paying.
Product
pos
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 27, 2026WeKnora before 0.8.2 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in isRestrictedIP() that misclassifies NAT64-prefixed IPv6 addresses as public.CVE-2026-118376 · Other software · Tencent · reported by VulnCheckMedium 6
WeKnora before 0.8.2 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in isRestrictedIP() that misclassifies NAT64-prefixed IPv6 addresses as public. Authenticated attackers can supply URLs resolving to NAT64 encodings of internal addresses via web_fetch or URL-based knowledge import to reach internal services or cloud metadata endpoints.
Product
WeKnora
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 27, 2026CrushFTP before 7.3.0 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to perform administrative actions because CSRF protection is disCVE-2015-20129 · Other software · CrushFTP · reported by VulnCheckHigh 8.6
CrushFTP before 7.3.0 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to perform administrative actions because CSRF protection is disabled by default. Attackers can lure an authenticated administrator to a malicious page that submits POST requests to commands like setUserItem, creating root-access users or changing server configuration.
Product
CrushFTP
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record crushftp.com exploit-db.com
Oct 27, 2026A vulnerability allowing an unauthenticated attacker to bypass REST API authentication with a forged federation token and receive responses from REST API endpoiCVE-2026-106078 · Other software · Veeam · reported by support@hackerone.comMedium 6.9
A vulnerability allowing an unauthenticated attacker to bypass REST API authentication with a forged federation token and receive responses from REST API endpoints that do not call the Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365 backup service.
Product
Backup for Microsoft 365
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record veeam.com
Oct 27, 2026Newsletters: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)CVE-2026-116863 · WordPress plugins & themes · reported by PatchstackCritical 9.6
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Tribulant Software Newsletters newsletters-lite allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Newsletters: from n/a through 4.18.2.
Product
Newsletters
Affected
up to 4.18.2
What to do
Affects up to 4.18.2. Update Newsletters to the newest version and check its changelog mentions this fix; if there isn’t one yet, deactivate it until there is.
Full record and what to do →NVD record patchstack.com
Oct 27, 2026Artalk before 2.10.1 contains an unauthenticated server-side request forgery vulnerability that allows remote attackers to make the server fetch arbitrary URLs CVE-2026-117565 · Other software · ArtalkJS · reported by VulnCheckMedium 6.9
Artalk before 2.10.1 contains an unauthenticated server-side request forgery vulnerability that allows remote attackers to make the server fetch arbitrary URLs by submitting anonymous comments to /api/v2/comments. Attackers can set a page_key to an internal URL, which GetTitleByURL fetches after only scheme validation, then read the page title through the public comment list.
Product
Artalk
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 27, 2026nest-admin before 1.0.1 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to forge administrator tokens by using a hardcodedCVE-2026-117564 · Other software · buqiyuan · reported by VulnCheckCritical 9.3
nest-admin before 1.0.1 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to forge administrator tokens by using a hardcoded JWT_SECRET committed in .env.production. Attackers can sign tokens with the known secret that JwtStrategy and RbacGuard trust, impersonating any user ID or claiming the admin role for full administrative access.
Product
nest-admin
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com github.com
Oct 27, 2026NVIDIA TensorRT-LLM contains a vulnerability where an attacker could cause a server-side request forgery.CVE-2026-65120 · Other software · NVIDIA · reported by psirt@nvidia.comHigh 7.1
NVIDIA TensorRT-LLM contains a vulnerability where an attacker could cause a server-side request forgery. A successful exploit of this vulnerability might lead to information disclosure.
Product
TensorRT-LLM
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com nvd.nist.gov
Oct 27, 2026NVIDIA TensorRT-LLM contains a vulnerability where an attacker could cause a server-side request forgery.CVE-2026-24269 · Other software · NVIDIA · reported by psirt@nvidia.comHigh 7.1
NVIDIA TensorRT-LLM contains a vulnerability where an attacker could cause a server-side request forgery. A successful exploit of this vulnerability might lead to information disclosure and data tampering.
Product
TensorRT-LLM
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com nvd.nist.gov
Oct 27, 2026REDAXO before 5.21.3 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the backend user administration page (users/users) because the CSRF token check onlyCVE-2026-117536 · Other software · redaxo · reported by VulnCheckHigh 8.6
REDAXO before 5.21.3 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the backend user administration page (users/users) because the CSRF token check only runs when the save parameter is set, while the update path triggered by FUNC_UPDATE does not require it. Attackers can lure a logged-in backend user with the users[] permission to a crafted GET link to grant administrator rights, deactivate accounts, or lock out the sole administrator.
Product
core
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com vulncheck.com
Oct 27, 2026REDAXO before 5.21.3 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the structure/history plugin that allows attackers to delete history or roll back coCVE-2026-117534 · Other software · redaxo · reported by VulnCheckMedium 5.1
REDAXO before 5.21.3 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the structure/history plugin that allows attackers to delete history or roll back content via unvalidated GET requests. Attackers can lure logged-in backend users to a page triggering func=clearall or rex_history_function=snap, permanently deleting all article snapshots or reverting articles to earlier states.
Product
core
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com vulncheck.com
Oct 27, 2026REDAXO before 5.21.5 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability because the backend processes the safemode GET parameter in index.php without validatinCVE-2026-116895 · Other software · redaxo · reported by VulnCheckMedium 5.1
REDAXO before 5.21.5 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability because the backend processes the safemode GET parameter in index.php without validating a CSRF token. Attackers can lure a logged-in administrator into opening a crafted link to disable global safe mode, writing safe_mode: false to config.yml, or enable session safe mode, disabling backend addons.
Product
core
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com vulncheck.com
Oct 27, 2026Semantic MediaWiki from 3.0.0 before 7.3.1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in Special:SMWAdmin because it overwrites the wpEditToken with a CVE-2026-116880 · Other software · SemanticMediaWiki · reported by VulnCheckHigh 7.1
Semantic MediaWiki from 3.0.0 before 7.3.1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in Special:SMWAdmin because it overwrites the wpEditToken with a freshly generated valid token. Attackers can lure an authenticated smw-admin user to a malicious page that triggers schema setup, entity-disposal, or job actions, causing semantic data loss and resource exhaustion.
Product
SemanticMediaWiki
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com vulncheck.com
Oct 26, 2026A malicious actor who lures an authenticated user to a malicious page could exploit a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability found in airMAX M devices CVE-2026-116839 · Network & remote access · Ubiquiti Inc · reported by fe490ce8-0395-4072-90d8-2707e1bdf984High 7.1
A malicious actor who lures an authenticated user to a malicious page could exploit a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability found in airMAX M devices to make unauthorized changes and execute a Denial of Service (DoS) attack on the device.
Product
airMAX M
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record uisp.community.ui.com
Oct 26, 2026A malicious actor who lures an authenticated user to a malicious page could exploit a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability found in airMAX M devices CVE-2026-116838 · Network & remote access · Ubiquiti Inc · reported by fe490ce8-0395-4072-90d8-2707e1bdf984High 8.8
A malicious actor who lures an authenticated user to a malicious page could exploit a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability found in airMAX M devices to execute a Command Injection on the device.
Product
airMAX M
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record uisp.community.ui.com
Oct 26, 2026YesWiki before 4.7.0 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in the Bazar CSV import copyUrlToLocalFile() function that allows authenticated adminiCVE-2026-116827 · Other software · YesWiki · reported by VulnCheckHigh 8.2
YesWiki before 4.7.0 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in the Bazar CSV import copyUrlToLocalFile() function that allows authenticated administrators to make arbitrary outbound requests by supplying crafted URLs in CSV file or image fields. Attackers can bypass the extension check with a query-string suffix or redirects to fetch cloud metadata credentials, internal services, or local files via file://, with responses stored in the web-accessible files/ directory.
Product
yeswiki
What to do
Apply the vendor’s update. The NVD record links to the advisory.
Full record and what to do →NVD record github.com vulncheck.com

Where this comes from: the exploited list is CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. Everything else is the whole National Vulnerability Database, where each record is published by the team that found the bug (Wordfence, Patchstack, WPScan, the vendors themselves and others); we show who. Exploit odds are FIRST’s EPSS, updated daily. Titles and categories are ours, so check the linked record before acting on a detail. For a write-up of the big ones, see our advisories. Every vendor, and every WordPress plugin and theme with a recorded flaw, also has its own page. All of it is free to reuse as JSON, CSV or RSS.

Weekly security brief

The flaws that hit local websites, every Friday.

One short email: what got exploited this week, which WordPress plugins broke, and what to check. Unsubscribe in one click.

Vulnerability database

The flaws that hit local websites, every Friday.

Tell us what you're building.